A Comparison of National Socialism (Fascism) and International Socialism (Communism)
In modern political discourse, Fascism and Communism are often portrayed as opposite extremes, with Communism categorized as far-left and Fascism as far-right. However, this false dichotomy obscures their common roots in socialist, collectivist, and authoritarian governance. The truth is, Fascism (National Socialism) and Communism (International Socialism) are ideological cousins, both advocating for centralized government control, limitations on individual liberties, and state-directed economies. While they may differ in rhetoric and nationalism, their practical applications result in the same outcome—authoritarianism, suppression of dissent, and the elimination of personal freedoms.
Contrary to common belief, both ideologies are left-wing relative to the U.S. Constitution, which is based on limited government, individual liberty, and free-market capitalism. While Fascism is slightly to the right of Communism, it is still far to the left of classical liberalism, constitutional conservatism, and even traditional Democratic values. Moreover, modern Progressivism shares significant ideological DNA with both Fascism and Communism, particularly in its embrace of centralized power, state-controlled narratives, and suppression of dissent through cultural institutions (media, education, corporate DEI programs).
Note: Communism, in theory, envisions a stateless, classless utopia where all property is collectively owned, and government is unnecessary because society operates in perfect harmony without coercion. However, in practice, achieving this requires an all-powerful state to forcibly abolish private property, suppress dissent, and "re-educate" individuals to embrace collectivism—ironically creating the most oppressive and centralized governments in history. The utopia is impossible because it contradicts human nature, which is inherently self-interested (Jeremiah 17:9, Romans 3:23), leading those in power to hoard control rather than relinquish it. Additionally, without individual incentives, economies stagnate, innovation ceases, and corruption flourishes, resulting in poverty, tyranny, and mass suffering rather than equality and abundance. Every communist regime—from the USSR to Maoist China—has devolved into authoritarian rule, proving that the theoretical stateless paradise is a dangerous illusion that always results in totalitarian nightmare.
Key Similarities Between Fascism and Communism
| Category | Fascism (National Socialism) | Communism (International Socialism) |
|---|---|---|
| Core Ideology | State-controlled economy with some private enterprise, all directed toward the national interest. | State-controlled economy with no private property—full government ownership of production. |
| Government Power | Highly centralized—authoritarian state dictates nearly all aspects of life. | Highly centralized—the government owns and controls all aspects of society. |
| Elimination of Political Opposition | Suppresses dissent through censorship, secret police, and political persecution. | Suppresses dissent through censorship, secret police, and political persecution. |
| Control Over Speech & Thought | Censors and punishes speech that contradicts the state narrative. | Censors and punishes speech that contradicts the state narrative. |
| Economic Model | State-controlled capitalism—businesses exist but are subservient to the government. | State-controlled communism—businesses and private property are abolished. |
| Propaganda & Indoctrination | Controls media, education, and cultural institutions to reinforce state ideology. | Controls media, education, and cultural institutions to reinforce state ideology. |
| Use of Political Violence | Uses militarized police, secret police, and street thugs (e.g., Brownshirts) to silence opponents. | Uses militarized police, secret police, and street thugs (e.g., Red Guards) to silence opponents. |
| View of Religion | Opposes religious institutions unless they align with state ideology. | Eliminates religious institutions, as Communism is inherently atheistic. |
| Militarism & Expansionism | Seeks nationalist expansion through war and conquest (e.g., Nazi Germany, Mussolini’s Italy). | Seeks global revolution through class warfare and international communist expansion (e.g., USSR, Maoist China). |
While Communism emphasizes international class struggle, Fascism promotes national unity and hierarchy—but in practice, both systems function the same way: totalitarian rule, centralized power, and suppression of individual freedom.
How These Are Both Left-Wing Relative to the U.S. Constitution
Right and Left Are Relative Terms
The political spectrum is not absolute, but depends on the context of the nation. In the U.S. system, which is built on limited government, decentralized power, and constitutional rights, both Fascism and Communism are far-left because they advocate for state control over the individual.
U.S. Political Spectrum Relative to Fascism and Communism
| Political Position | Key Beliefs | Examples |
|---|---|---|
| Far-Left | Full government ownership of corporations and industry, absolute control over speech, authoritarian rule, and political persecution. | Communism (USSR, China, North Korea) |
| Left | State control over corporations and markets, authoritarian central government, dominance over cultural institutions. | Fascism (Nazi Germany, Mussolini’s Italy) |
| Progressive Left | A bloated administrative state where unelected bureaucrats create and enforce policies without legislative approval, heavy government regulation, wealth redistribution, DEI mandates, speech restrictions, political censorship, ESG enforcement, corporate-state collusion, lawfare against political opponents, control over corporate media and public education, and a view of the U.S. Constitution as an outdated, evolving document that must be reinterpreted or bypassed to achieve social progress. | Modern U.S. Progressivism (including DEI, ESG enforcement, radical left-wing activism, advocates for Green New Deal-style policies, postliberal state-driven social engineering, collectivist identity politics, and a technocratic administrative state |
| Moderate Left | Partial Interventionists. Regulated capitalism with a strong welfare state. Affirms constitutional rights, though often with a more flexible, evolving interpretation than conservatives. | Traditional Democrats (1950s-1990s U.S.) |
| Center-Right | Limited government, individual liberty, constitutional rights | Conservatives, Classical Liberalism |
| Far-Right | Anarchism, complete abolition of the state and government authority. | Libertarian anarchists |
Thus, while Fascism is “right” of Communism, it is still deeply left-wing in relation to the U.S. Constitution, which prioritizes individual liberty over government power. The more government intervenes, regulates, and centralizes power, the further left it moves. Conversely, the less a government intervenes and decentralizes power, the further right it moves relative to the U.S. Constitution
How Fascism and Communism Resemble Modern Progressivism
Modern Progressivism, while distinct from classical Fascism and Communism, shares ideological similarities with both in its embrace of government control, limitations on free speech, and reliance on corporate-state alliances (e.g., ESG, DEI, and media narratives).
| Category | Fascism & Communism | Modern Progressivism |
|---|---|---|
| Government Centralization | Advocates for massive state power over all aspects of life. | Expands federal power through bureaucratic control, mandates, and regulations. |
| Censorship & Thought Control | Silences opposition through government-run media and suppression of speech. | Silences opposition via Big Tech censorship, media propaganda, and DEI policies. |
| Corporate-State Merging | In Fascism, the state controls corporations; in Communism, the state owns all business. | Big corporations align with government mandates (e.g., vaccine mandates, ESG investment requirements). |
| Identity Politics | Uses class or national identity to divide people. | Uses race, gender, and intersectionality to divide people. |
| Political Persecution | Uses state agencies to target opponents (e.g., Gestapo, KGB). | Uses FBI, IRS, and DOJ to target political dissidents (e.g., surveillance of conservatives, censorship of “misinformation”). |
| Education Indoctrination | Controls education to teach state-approved ideology. | Controls education through CRT, gender theory, and progressive curricula. |
| DEI and Social Engineering | Imposed "equality" through state force (e.g., Stalinist quotas, Nazi racial purity laws). | DEI mandates, affirmative action, ESG scoring force ideological compliance. |
While modern Progressivism does not fully embrace the violent authoritarianism of historical Fascism or Communism, it advocates for the same basic principle: greater government control over speech, business, education, and personal life.
Conclusion: Why This Matters
Communism, Fascism, and Progressivism all share a common enemy: individual liberty.
Each ideology, while different in rhetoric, demands that the state assume ultimate control over society—whether in the name of class struggle (Communism), national strength (Fascism), or social justice (Progressivism).
Relative to the U.S. Constitution, both Fascism and Communism are left-wing ideologies that reject individual freedom, decentralized government, and constitutional protections. While Progressivism has not yet reached the level of full authoritarianism, its trajectory aligns with past totalitarian movements, emphasizing state control, speech suppression, and the centralization of power.
Confessional Christianity stands in stark contrast to both Communism and Fascism, as it affirms the inherent dignity of the individual while recognizing mankind’s sinful nature (Romans 3:23). Unlike these totalitarian ideologies, which seek to concentrate power in the hands of an elite ruling class, biblical Christianity affirms limited and accountable government (Romans 13:1-7), the rule of law (Deuteronomy 16:18-20), and the separation of powers—all safeguards against human depravity. The Founders of the United States, influenced by Reformed thought, understood that because man is prone to corruption, unchecked power will always lead to tyranny (Jeremiah 17:9). This is why the Constitution divides authority between branches of government, ensuring that no one man or group wields absolute control. In contrast to Communism, which denies God and demands total allegiance to the state, and Fascism, which idolizes national or racial supremacy, Christianity teaches that only God is sovereign and that rulers must be held accountable to Him (Psalm 2:10-12). The Christian worldview rightly balances freedom with moral responsibility, ensuring that governments serve the people rather than enslaving them. Only under God’s moral order, where power is restrained and justice upheld, can a society flourish in true liberty and righteousness (Micah 6:8).
The Bible repeatedly warns against tyranny by highlighting the dangers of unchecked power, corrupt rulers, and oppressive governments:
God Warns Israel Against a King (1 Samuel 8:10-18) – When Israel demanded a king, God warned them that a ruler would take their sons for war, tax their wealth, seize their land, and make them servants. This foreshadowed how centralized power leads to oppression.
The Tower of Babel (Genesis 11:1-9) – A unified world under one authoritarian regime sought to defy God. In response, He scattered the people, showing that concentrated human power leads to rebellion against divine authority.
The Beast of Revelation (Revelation 13:16-17) – A future world system enforces total control over commerce, speech, and worship, demonstrating the ultimate tyranny that arises when government demands absolute allegiance.
Nebuchadnezzar’s Tyranny (Daniel 3, 4) – The Babylonian king demanded worship, punished dissent, and exalted himself above God, until he was humbled. This serves as a warning against rulers who seek total domination.
From Genesis to Revelation, the Bible warns that unchecked power leads to oppression, and only God’s authority is truly just. It teaches that governments must be restrained, rulers held accountable, and people must resist absolute control that seeks to replace God with the state.
Final Thought:
Perhaps the most brazen and deceitful distortion in modern political discourse is the deliberate hijacking of the term "fascism" to demonize conservatives. Despite the undeniable historical reality that fascism, like communism, is a left-wing ideology rooted in centralized government control, collectivism, and authoritarianism, it has been falsely weaponized in the U.S. to smear those who, in truth, stand for the very opposite principles—limited government, constitutional liberty, and individual rights. This deception has been achieved through a combination of propaganda, the illusory truth effect, gaslighting, and what Joseph Goebbels termed ‘The Big Lie’—the idea that a massive falsehood, if repeated often enough, will be accepted as truth.
This tactic aligns perfectly with another infamous totalitarian strategy: "Accuse your enemies of what you are guilty of." By controlling language and manipulating historical narratives, progressive institutions have effectively rebranded the defenders of liberty as tyrants, while simultaneously embracing the very authoritarianism they claim to oppose. In reality, modern progressivism, with its emphasis on state control, speech suppression, and corporate-government collusion, bears far greater resemblance to historical fascism than American conservatism ever could. This calculated reversal of truth is not just a political maneuver—it is one of the greatest rhetorical frauds of the modern age.
The lesson from history is clear: The greater the power of government, the lesser the freedom of the individual.
-----
Questions
1) Would you agree with Horseshoe Theory, which places Fascism on the far-right and Communism on the far-left?
Horseshoe Theory is the idea that the far-left and far-right, rather than being opposites, actually bend toward each other, resembling the shape of a horseshoe. It suggests that extreme ends of the political spectrum share similar traits, despite their differing rhetoric. The horseshoe model is misleading because it prioritizes cultural differences (e.g., nationalism vs. internationalism) while ignoring the central issue of government power:
- Fascism & Communism both demand massive state control – Authoritarianism, censorship, economic regulation, and political persecution define both.
- Neither is right-wing in the American sense – The U.S. Constitution’s right-wing tradition is rooted in individual liberty, free markets, and limited government—all antithetical to Fascism.
- True far-right would be anarchism – If the left-right spectrum is measured by government control, then totalitarianism (Fascism/Communism) belongs on the left, while the true far-right would be anarchism—the complete absence of government.
The kissing cousins Fascism (National Socialism) and Communism (International Socialism) are two sides of the same authoritarian coin, while true conservatism and classical liberalism stand in opposition to both.
2) What is your take on the movement of the Overton Window in recent decades?
Clearly what was once considered far-left is now mainstream, while center-right positions from past decades are now labeled radical or extremist. It seems like some of what is driving the shift is corporate-state collusion, the radicalization of academia, expansion of bureaucratic power and identity politics. The Overton Window has shifted so far left that views once held by moderate Democrats (free speech, border security, colorblind equality) are now seen as far-right or reactionary. Meanwhile, once-radical ideas—state-controlled speech, identity-based governance, wealth redistribution—are now considered mainstream.
In the 1970s Limited government conservatism coexisted with welfare-state liberalism, but without the radical statism of today’s progressivism. While the administrative state existed, unelected bureaucrats had less power compared to today. Courts had not yet fully embraced an activist role in policymaking, and agencies like the EPA and Department of Education (both created in the 1970s) were just beginning to expand federal control over the economy and education.
Yes, the federal government had expanded significantly under FDR’s New Deal (1930s) and LBJ’s Great Society (1960s) However, government intervention was still more limited compared to Europe. Both Democrats and Republicans still widely affirmed constitutional rights, with varying interpretations. While liberal Democrats supported more government programs, they generally did not advocate for speech restrictions or government control over corporations in the way that modern progressives do today. In fact, Democrats were often champions of First Amendment rights, until they weren't.
The Democrat Party has clearly shifted from center-left, welfare-state liberalism to a bureaucratic, POSTLIBERAL movement advocating centralized control over culture, economy, and speech. If there are any traditional Democrats left, they may be afraid to speak up.
-----
Related Article